Extending the licensing policy: BSD license for cmake files

[Ingo Klöcker]

On Sunday 06 September 2009, Harri Porten wrote:
> On Sun, 6 Sep 2009, Ingo Klöcker wrote:
> > How does repeating the term "Copyright", once spelled out and once
> > written as "(C)" (which is not acknowledged by the Copyright laws),
> > emphasize the copyright statement.
>
> Note I am talking about mortal readers rather than copyright laywers
> here.
>
> The symbol is well known and eye-catching. The word spells things out
> and provides a precise meaning. Whether it's redundant,
> not-acknowledged ascii-art or even void is one thing. Unless some
> laywers tell us that it *hurts* I wouldn't stop an author from
> decreasing the chance of someone overlooking the notice or being able
> able to claim so.
>
> > The circle C symbol is an alternative to spelling out the word
> > Copyright. Either one uses the symbol (as abbreviation) or one
> > uses "Copyright", but one never uses both in the same copyright
> > statement.
>
> How do you mean by "one never uses"? I have personally seen hundreds
> of copyright owners do so (grep your /usr/include for also recent
> samples) and won't challenge the prudence of laywers from Nokia,
> Apple and the like.

I wasn't talking about source code, but about books. Hmm, forget it. In 
books it does indeed seem to be common to write
  Copyright © <year> <author>

So much for the difference between theory and practice. I guess I'll 
stop advocating for omitting the (C). :-/


Regards,
Ingo
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-core-devel/attachments/20090906/0211a75a/attachment.sig>